This is now the third write-up we’ve done since February on this continued legal fight for a seat on the North Carolina Supreme Court. As we wrote in February, the election for this NC Supreme Court was held in November 2024—over 6 months ago! Current NC Supreme Court Justice Allison Riggs had more votes at the original tally, but challenger Jefferson Griffin has maintained that some of those votes (enough to change the election results) are illegitimate. For those keeping score, Riggs won the first two decisions—by the State Board of Elections and the state trial court—while Griffin won the next three—one by the state appeals court and two by the state Supreme Court. Two days ago, Riggs notched a third victory of her own, this time by a federal trial court.
Specifically, on May 5, 2025, Judge Richard E. Myers II of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina found in favor of Riggs by focusing on the retroactive application of voting rules and the rights of overseas military and civilian voters, as well as “Never Residents” who were deemed ineligible to vote. The court found that the retroactive invalidation of absentee ballots cast by overseas military and civilian voters violated their substantive due process rights. The court also determined that the cure process established by the NC Supreme Court, which required these voters to provide photo identification after the election, violated their equal protection rights because it treated voters in different counties unequally. Griffin v. N. Carolina State Bd. of Elections, No. 5:24-CV-00699-M, 2025 WL 1292530, at *2, *17 (E.D.N.C. May 5, 2025).
The court further concluded that the lack of any process for individuals erroneously designated as “Never Residents” to contest their designation violated their procedural due process rights and imposed an unconstitutional burden on their right to vote. Id. The court ordered the State Board of Elections not to implement the orders from the North Carolina Court of Appeals and Supreme Court, which would have enforced these retroactive changes, and instead to certify the election results for Riggs based on the original tally. Id. at *2, *35. The court’s decision was influenced by the principles established in previous cases, such as Bush v. Gore, 531 U.S. 98 (2000), which emphasized the importance of equal protection in voting and the prohibition of arbitrary and disparate treatment of voters. Id. at *13, *17. The court also relied on substantive due process principles, highlighting that retroactive changes to election procedures that disenfranchise voters who relied on established rules are fundamentally unfair. Id. at *17, *25.
What’s next in this legal saga? Well, as this was being written, Griffin conceded to incumbent Riggs, ending this drawn-out election litigation challenge. Was Griffin’s claim that votes were counted that violated state law all for naught? Not exactly. As one commentator notes, “Jefferson Griffin’s challenge of his election loss has resulted in victories that will make North Carolina’s elections more secure.” And election security is essential for public trust in elections. While election day victors will often decry litigation targeting their win, it is important that merited election lawsuits play out to ensure federal and state election laws are correctly followed.
Josiah Contarino is counsel at Dhillon Law Group Inc. where he practices election law, commercial litigation, First Amendment, Second Amendment, and defamation law in state and federal courts.
